Two Wolf Stories
 

I'll preface this by saying I'm not in the wolves-are-Satan-incarnate school.

Story #1: I moved back to Montana six years ago, after many years away. I went to work for a big time hunter, who had hunted the northwestern part of the state (Region 1). He was just full of tales of woe about how the wolves were pushing whitetails up there to the brink of extinction. He was "giving up hunting there anymore 'cause the wolves had killed them all", you know the refrain. Well, I'd just moved back and having been out of the loop for a while, I didn't have much to say, other than to wonder why now?, since wolves had always been there.

Anyhow, I was motivated by his stories to do some research, and about 12 minutes into my "research" I discovered that northwestern MT had had an absolutely brutal winter two years prior that had killed 40% of the whitetails. This winter never rated a mention with the guy! Incidentally, that herd is coming back quite nicely since then, if the ever more generous doe tags they are offering up there are any indicator.

Story #2: I scout elk just everywhere, if it's in Region 2 or the north half of Region 3, I've probably been there, and maybe hunted it. That's a sweep of country about 200 x 100 miles. Anyhow, in the past two years I have discovered a honeyhole, a piece of country with, in my experience, the best elk hunting I have found. Now, imagine my surprise to find that a prominent local elk hunter has hunted this same spot for years, but is giving it up. He's telling everybody that (you probably can guess) wolves have ruined the hunt by killing off all the elk! I mean this is the best elk hunt I've ever seen, and this guy is convinced that the wolves have pushed the elk to the brink of extinction. The guy is considered to be an elk-hunting wizard. Incidentally, the F & G has reported succeeding record elk counts up there for two or three years running.

The moral of the story is to take tales of wolves with a grain, or better two grains, of salt.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I like the post Dirt2. This has been my experience with wolf stories. I DO believe wolves are a problem in some areas. Meaning they need to be controlled due to over population and we do need to get control in state hands. But the blanket statement that wolves are killing everything just never seems to hold water once the facts are laid out and as you said, are tales. Wolves are blamed for other factors and the impact they have is often exaggerated.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

They are killing and eating machines. How much meat can 1000 wolves eat? Any idea? I don't either, but that is the last count on number of wolves in Wy,Mt,Id. 5 pounds a day? thats 5000 pounds each day or about 8 elk. 365 days a year, well over 2000 elk each year, not to mention how many are killed and not eaten. I see no good coming from introduced wolves. Just less hunting opportunities and less chance of filling my freezer.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Giving your figures are correct, that is less than 700 elk per state. Wolves mainly prey on the old and others weaken by disease since they are easier to bring down, would you want to eat a old, diseased elk? "Killed and not eaten" what makes you believe wolves would expend energy to chase and kill an animal and not eat it???? Humans are knowned to to that, which is why it is a crime in all the states, but not wolves.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

RandyA and lostwy, our own Fish&Wildlife Service figure that each wolf kills 1.5 elk per week, of course that is averaged over a year. With a 1000 wolves? I don't know the overall number, the only hard fact nuber I know of is that their are 400 wolves in Central Idaho. But guessing 1000 wolves? That comes to 1500 elk per week, 6,000 per month, 72,000 elk per year. If it seem high its because it is, they do kill a lot of elk, not just the weak and the sick. Thats a holywood bedtime story that many wolf lovers want people to believe. I just went to a Idaho Fish & Game meeting here in Idaho Falls last night. One the big issues was the wolves, they are trying to get permision to go in and remove (kill) packs of wolves in problems area's like in Central Idaho. Wolves are a problem all right a huge problem. I am not saying that we need to kill each and every one off, but we need to be able to control them. That means delisting them off the endangered speices list and managing them like a bear or lion. As far as them killing elk and other animals for fun well they do that quite a bit too.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Just remember that the big herd bulls which are breeding the cows and have been defending there harem, fending off other bulls, keeping there cows in check, have lost a considerable amount of body fat over there rut season, are now one of the weak elk. These big herd bulls which are passing on there gene pool for healthy offspring, are now prime candidates for wolf bait....by the way, we have to have the wolves for the health of the herd---Right??

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Well I don't have 2 wolf stories but I have one, 2 wolf story.

I was out looking for a mule deer and happened upon a pack of wolves chasing some white-tails in a cutblock. I got set up with my lever-action .300 savage and started squeeling on a fawn distress call (eastman deer talk call). Two wolves came a runnin at me. I hit the far one (about 75 or 80 yards) and then dumped the close one at 40 paces. Had to get back on the far one and emptied my gun at him. Killed him with the 6th shot.

One of the wolves was collared as part of a study being done by the University of Alberta and Fish & Wildlife. I sold the carcuses and returned the collar to the fellow doing the study. He said that so far the prey taken and frequency depends upon pack size. It seems that if a pack is less than 7 animals it takes more deer than anything and about 1 every 2 or 3 days. If the pack is larger than 8 then they tend to try for moose or elk more often. F&W does not have a real good handle of the #of wolves (and pack sizes) in Alberta but this study is opening some eyes. Most hunters and outfitters I talk to say they are seeing many more wolves and wolf track than they have for many years.

Robin

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Fantasy and poppycock! It was documented last winter that a pack moved onto one of the feed grounds here in Wy. They killed 23 elk that the G&F could find. No one knew how many ran off and died from stress. They like to kill and use killing to train the young.

Here is letter from a real rancher in a real world with real wolf problems. They live about 55 miles from me and this is her letter to the editor of the local papers.

Meeteese wolves don't fear humans





Editor:

I would like to comment on something that Ed Bangs said during the most recent incidents with the wolves out of Meeteetse: "Any human activity will scare wolves off their prey; otherwise they would have eaten the whole horse."

I live and work on a ranch in this area where we have had seven confirmed wolf kills, and none of the animals were eaten. Two of the animals were killed in fields directly behind my house; all of the others were killed in mountainous pastures with no human activity. In one incident, the wolves killed four full-grown cattle in an area of 50 feet. Since no one is around the area to scare them off, please explain to me why they weren't eaten. If wolves are so scared of humans, how come they walk up to my husband while he is dragging meadows and stare at him, why do they come up to us 100 yards or less when we are calving, why do they come up to our yard fence and walk through the ranch when we are present, why did they have their pups directly above where the loggers are cutting?

I would also like to tell you that wolves don't kill only when they are hungry. Many times they will kill animals to show their young howl, yet they don't eat them. If you would like to see this slaughter, head to the nearest ranch. If you can't get out of your office to see this, then look back at the seminar that was put on in 1994 at the Meeteetse gymnasium. At that program were pictures of a considerable amount of deer in Canada that were slaughtered by wolves. None were eaten; the only thing eaten on some were the fetuses out of the pregnant doe.

I would also like to correct another comment that you used in an earlier article. This is in regards to the "Black Widow." You seem to think that if you kill her off that the other wolves will not know how to kill cattle/sheep. Wolves instinctively know how to kill and refine their skills by observing the older wolves. They don't decipher between an elk and a cow. It is food, mostly a sport, and it is killed in the exact same way. We have watched them kill elk and their young the same way that they have our cattle.

Maybe these words will help you to understand the animal instead of reading junk out of a book that is inaccurate.

KARLA GITLITZ, Meeteetse

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I have come across more dead animals every year. I dont beleive that they are not making an impact on the elk and deer herds. If they are not a problem, then why is Fish and Game pushing for killing those in troubled areas with the backing of trained biologists? The greenies feed off of posts like this and I don't intend to give them any food for thought. I have personally witnessed and heard of wolves coming into elk calls. To them it is a dinner bell. Yes they will definatly cull the sick and week but also the disadvantaged such as the bulls that robinhood36 spoke about. The presence of wolves also puts additional stress on the animals trying to make it through on the winter range. If an elk is teetering on the fence of weekness , a wolf will definately have its next meal. Cows that are stresed on the winter range will yeild lower calf rates and or the calves will not be up to par if they are born. The wolves have a snowball effect far beyond the downing of game. It carries over you calf yields and mortality rates. Couple in a hard winter with high stress rates and the elk herds will deplete quicker that they are being replentished.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

If wolves only kill the weak and sick I have some ocean front property to sell you in Arizona. I talked to a biologist around Gardiner north of the park and he said the wolves are really taking a toll on the northern elk herd,. Why did late season permits go from 1400 this year to 140 next year. Drought, mountian lions, and grizzlies guess again. I have seen wolves around the park and they are killing machines that will kill and leave animals to rot, especially bighorn sheep. I live in the bitterroot and they will deplete the numbers around here in time. They already have pretty good numbers in the west fork and east fork. When they first put them in the park they had 2 litters a year and now they are back to one litter per year because the elk numbers are down, so when the wild game is really depleted and smartened up, what do you think they will be eating. 2point

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Talking to another biologist in Salmon Idaho, he said they radio collard 90 elk calves last summer and only 5 of them are living now. I bet you can't guess what killed them. Humm let me think about that, hmmm again I don't know. Oh all right I'll just take a guess could it be WOLVES. Ding ding ding you and I are both winners! I do believe the day is comming that we will see a hunting season. But until then SSS all the way!

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

The head nuts, Ed Bangs, says lions, bears, and the drought are all contibuting to the decline. He is full of doo doo. The whole state of Wyoming is in about year 7 of a prolonged drought, but in non-wolf areas elk numbers are increasing. And in heavey wolf areas where we used to run lion we can't even find a set of tracks. My son puts in about 40 days each winter hunting, mostly treeing and photgraphing cats, not killing, and so far this winter in the areas with high wolf populations, not a singel cat. Other oufitters are saying the same thing. I think the wolf has displaced them, or forced them to move to different areas, and maybe even killed many young cats.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Might take a look at this webpage--

http://www.mtmultipleuse.org/wolf_pics.htm

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Everyone needs to read Robinhoods post of that thread.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

RobinHood36, Good read and 100% the truth, to bad we couldn't show this to the hollywood green tree hugger type in real life with their own eyes. But even then they are so stupid they would come up with some excuse to defend the wolves.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Rather-be-hunting, I agree with you that wolves need to be managed. I really wanted to illustrate with this post a thing called "mass hysteria". My two stories illustrate it, and a general cruise of responses to my thread really highlights it. Unfortunately, these slobbering attitudes cost us in the real world with nonhunters.

One guy can't talk down a screaming horde, but a couple points. If the horror stories were representative of the general reality, then obviously the last game animal would have been extinct centuries before Columbus ever came onto the continent. Study and you'll find that the Indians, who relied on game meat, killed probably more animals nationwide than modern hunters do, and also let wolves have the run of the place. Yet, miraculously we still have game today.

A major case in point is the way elk and wolves are being reported here in Montana. I just saw a guy on another post saying don't bother to come to MT because the wolves have ruined the elk hunting. This opinion is just so wildly off the mark I'm still shaking my head.

The hunting media is feeding the hysteria. I recently read an article on elk in Montana in Rocky Mountain Hunting & Fishing News. It's entire theme was that wolves are ruining the elk hunt, and their case in point was the Gardiner hunt, where cow tags have been eliminated. Think about it, in a state like MT, you're bound to find a place where elk are down, wolves or not. In fact, any objective report on elk in MT should be glowing, because these are the good old days. Even that article had to eventually admit elk were booming all over, but they made the claim that this was only true in areas without wolves. Again, it's poppycock, one of the areas they tout is the Bitterroot (my home range), but they seem unaware that we have wolves coming out our ears. Yet, we have elk numbers 20% over objectives and calf:cow ratios of 35 to 45;100. Statewide, elk numbers are booming in probably 90% of the elk range, including areas in the wolf recovery area.

The biggest problem we face right now in MT is the danger that ranchers get tired of elk knocking over their fences and raiding their haystacks, and demand reductions in elk numbers. They have already begun trying to alter our statewide management plans to limit elk numbers to what public land can support, and that is a scary thought.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Dirt2 it's human nature to have a knee jerk reaction and we are seeing it. Wolves have been gone for a while and rightly so people were concerned about the effects of reintroduction. It's change and change usually has both foretold and unforeseen consequences.

Remember the large number of elk that died in Wyoming, I believe it was in Wyoming, last year but they couldn't figure out what was killing them? Those elk lived for a short time while immobile. Imagine if an wolf pack came across that herd. The elk would have been finished off by the wolves but would have suffered death either way. However had the wolves finished off the elk extensive studies would never have been performed and we would have another "the wolves killed 170 some odd elk in Wyoming" headline.

In my state wolves do not have a real presence here yet. I watch deer and elk populations roller coaster in different units and again extensive studies are done to figure out the real reason. However if there were wolves in these areas I'm sure they would automatically be blamed. Again that is just human nature. To react first and then think later.

My point is it seems to me that much of the "wolf hysteria" is mostly a knee jerk reaction with only partial truths and reality mixed in. I do see a MAJOR problem with letting them live unmanaged. But a lot of the wolf hysteria seems to be much exaggerated. In time elk and other species will adapt to having an old predator in town with new tricks. Nature will find a way to balance and there will still be plenty of hunting opportunities for us all. BUT that is conditional on the fact that we can gets these things de-listed as I believe they have already over-populated in some areas.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Dirt, Wolves are a problem and need to be controlled. How do you explain the decline of the yellowstone elk heard that was around 19,000 head a few years back, and now the current count is 9,000 head. Thats 10,000 elk dead with-in 4 years. Harsh winter? OR Wolves? Maybe a combination of both, but I doubt it. The wolves kill for fun, they do eat some of the meat but they kill for training and fun. Thats what happened to the yellowstone heard along with most of the elk in WY & ID. I was just at the elk refuge over the weekend and asked if they have much predation from wolves. There is 2 resident wolves that freequent the refuge. To date there have been 15 elk killed by these 2 wolves, fewer than half were eaten. The others were left and eventually picked over by a pack of coyotes. Why do you think Teddy Roosevelt (one of the pioneers of hunting/conservation in our country) wanted to eliminate the wolves back then, because they were a problem then and have become a problem again with the reintroduction. There is good reason the wolves were on the brink of extinction. They need to be controled in order to protect our wildlife for future generations of hunters. I talked to an outfitter in Gardnier, MT who told me a wolf story. He was on his back deck watching a heard of elk feed in a medow in the spring. All of a sudden a pack of wolves attacked the heard killing 13 calves leaving all of them without eating a single one. He told me he sees this happen more often than you would think, he restated that the wolves are killing machines and love to kill for fun. Just had to vent. We don't have to kill every one, but they need regulation and controling be it by issuing a drawing for tags and let the hunters hunt them or other means.

Hyde

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Dirt regarding your post #1, For one thing I live in area 100 in the Kootenai National Forest and I am well aware of the problems the wolves have caused in this area and our biologist will not admit that there is a problem. They do kill for the thrill to kill, a friend of mine lost one of his cat dogs to a wolve and just left it lay and made headlines news here and they said it was just an isolated case and such issues as this is how they just bury there head in the sand and hope that the problem goes away. Dirt the winter your talking about that was so severe that it killed off a lot of wildlife was back in 96-97 I believe and yes it was a servere winter. I live here along the Canadain border and on one side of the border its illegal to shoot a wolf but on the other side of the fence its legal. I do not believe in a full down right massacre of the specie but they do need to be kept in cheque, if you think there is a shortage of wolves around here then come out here, you'll hear them all night long and find lots and lots of animal parts in the vacinity. Once every couple weeks I go down to Kalispell to pick up supplies and at times I can see a wolf off in the distance feeding on a road kill and as we approach closer it goes back into the bush and as you pass and look back you can see that wolf come back to that carcass.
The wolves effect the areas that I hunt and some areas I just won't even venture into if I know that the wolves have been hunting prior to myself. I think they need to have a limited hunt such as they do with cougar hunting here and when they reach a certain quota, cut it off. Just my .05 cents worth. Bobby

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Again, I completely agree that wolves need managed to keep their numbers within certain bounds. I monitor my own hunting areas very closely, and I assure you that if I see that wolves are depleting "my" elk herds, the words will be shoot, shovel, and shut up! I just hear so much of this doomsday talk that I can't sit silent anymore. Here in my neck of the woods, where it's an indisputable fact that elk numbers are going through the roof, you can walk into the local cafe any day of the week and hear three different guys talking about wolves and how they have destroyed the elk population.

In Yellowstone, the people running the program predicted that the elk population would be knocked back to 8 or 10 thousand by wolves. The 19 thousand level probably wasn't maintainable anyway, so it's kind of a false level of comparison.

I just want hunters to try to keep their heads a little bit on this issue. We can come off so crazy about wolves that people will just shut us out. We are really going to lose credibility in years to come if the doomsday prophecies don't come true.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I'd have to agree with everything idahoelkinstructor has said. I just came back from the Salmon Idaho area and there seemed to be evidence of plenty of wolves. I even came across an incident where a a cougar jumped an elk and before the cougar could begin the meal a pack of wolves sent the cat running and made a quick meal of things. Not a pretty sight.

From what I've heard (I've not yet confirmed) a federal judge just ruled that F & G can begin to manage the wolf populations in Idaho and Montana. The question now remains does F & G look at them like coyotes? allow trapping? or sell permits?

Ant

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Living in and making frequent visits to family living in northeastern Minnesota for all of the last 4+ decades, I've seen and heard recounted my first hand accounts of wolves in large numbers can do to the deer herds and moose population there.

Minnesota has the largest pop. of Timber (Grey) wolves in the lower 48. Normal winters most deer and moose can make it with wolves around. Of course they kill and eat a number. That's to be expected. Not a problem.

But in winters like this in those areas where they go 3 1/3 - 4+ feet standing snow, the deer especially follow trails much more frequently. Wolves and other big predators know that. And they do kill a ton of deer and many moose in winters lik this and when there's even more snow. Talk to fellow who live between the North Shore (Two Harbors to Grand Marais and North to Finland (MN)) with heavy snow they find many deer killed (obvious signing of struggle and wolve tracks) with little eaten, because they can kill much easier they eat choice parts and leave the rest.

If you haven't lived in area with many wolves, please don't try to tell people who have that they don't do significant damage to big game populations. It's just common sense....

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

MinnFinn, thats a good post. We are now living through them now! And there is a significant negative affect thus far on elk.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

RandyA - That's what I understand. I've hunted a couple years in that part of NW WY '02/'03. Even the local CO who has lived and worked that territory for many decades told us privately that they know wolves, grizzlies and cougars are having a substantial affect on big game. They're especially worried about the big dropoff of the number of Elk calves in that area. As I understand it, since Elk cows calve in large numbers in generally the same areas, these large predators know that and raise kane with the calf population. Low survival rate of offspring can't be good in the long-term for any animal.

I'm with those who want a reasonable management of these large predators. But because animals like grizzly bears and grey wolves are under Federal protection, it's incredibly difficult to get the Federal designation for them changed, so that states can write those management programs to keep a stable population of both predator and the game animals they feed on. And those who say SSS don't have the answer either. The fellow who said that online better check out what the penalties are for shooting a timber wolf or grizzly. Very large fines, equipment confiscated and even jail time. Not good.

It's just really strange though. It seems that people who talk about keeping so many wolves and grizzly bears think these never kill more than they eat and "the more of them the better." It's just not so.

Hopefully the pendulum will swing back to even center again someday and we can get limits established for these predators, so both they and the game we share hunting can do well. We can live with that.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Here is the latest news! The last sentence tells it all. More loss of states rights!

Judge rejects Wyoming wolf lawsuit

By MEAD GRUVER
Associated Press Writer Monday, March 21, 2005




CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) -- A federal judge here has dismissed Wyoming's lawsuit against the federal government over its decision to reject the state's plan for managing the descendants of wolves reintroduced in Yellowstone National Park.

U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson said he disagreed with the state's claim that the federal government violated the Endangered Species Act in rejecting the plan. The act didn't come into play because the rejection didn't determine wolves' status under the act, Johnson said in a ruling dated Friday.

"The federal defendants were not compelled by statute or regulation to approve the Wyoming plan, nor did the `best science available' mandate attach to their decision making process," Johnson wrote.

The Interior Department has required Wyoming, Montana and Idaho to submit plans for managing wolves before it will remove them from Endangered Species Act protection. It accepted the plans submitted by Montana and Idaho, but rejected Wyoming's plan.

Wyoming had wanted wolves considered a potential nuisance, allowing them to be shot with little oversight as they spread outside the Yellowstone region.

Johnson said the Endangered Species Act's requirements for scientific review only would come into play with delisting, or when wolves come up for status review under the act in 2008 -- five years after they were downgraded from "endangered" to "threatened."

Wyoming Attorney General Pat Crank said on Monday that the state is reviewing its options, which include appeal, legislative action and filing a petition for delisting. He said he expected it would be a week or so before a final decision on the state's next step was made.

Crank said the state was disappointed with Johnson's ruling and dismissed the notion that federal officials had tried to work with the state to come up with a plan acceptable to both.

"Our fate is controlled by a federal agency that's just not responsive, or in this case, not responsive at all, to the concerns of the state," Crank said.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

We are going to lose credibility!! WHO REALLY CARES what some anti hunting bunny hugger thinks anyway!! You can play games with them if you want but I don't care what they think. When they make statements such as "I would rather save the life of one earthworm than one hundred humans" and " a boy is a dog is pig" and put the life of rats and vermin above that of my fellow humans, I don't have time to pull punches with their kind. As for as ther being wolves before Columbus came to this country and game survived, this is true. It is also true that there is more game in the US today than at any time in recorded history!! Don't forget that our forfathers reduced the wolf to reasonable numbers before the population increased to what it is today. All of our ancestors were not idoits and feeble minded. They saw first hand what wolves were doing and took action. Something to think about---, didn't we pay tremendeous sums of money to buy wolves and bring them in from Canada while paying out a bounty on them in Alaska at the same time?? There were plenty of wolves in Idaho before the re-introduction began. The same with Yellowstone Park and that area. This is just another example of the bunny huggers craming their sick ideas down our throats. If you think that I resent it, you are 100 percent right. It's time for the Washington D.C. crowd of do gooders to clean up their own back yard and let the locals clean up theirs.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

WOW! Remind me to never piss you off Snooky! Good points, all of them.

"the meek shall inherate the earth" Yeah when we bury them in it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Randy; I'm really easy going until I have had enough then things change. I had enough of the animal rights crowd when we were defeating them at the ballot box a few years back. They are not just animal rights, or EQUAL animal rights where animals are totally equal with humans, They see animals as gods that are to be worshipped because they are superior to humans. If you don't stand up to them and instead try to handle them with kids gloves, you are seen as weak and already a victim to their perverted cause. They may stop all hunting, fishing, ranching, rodeos, fairs, gain the release of all captive animals, stop all eating of animal products, and make man the servants to the lesser species which is part of their goals, BUT there is one old fat man that they will hear from as long as he has breath. The sad part of all of this is that every hunting site with an open forum seems to have there fair share of sportsman who have fallen into their snare and are spreading there gospel without even being aware of what they are permoting. The wolf issue is one of their major projects and sportsman don't recognize it. Wolves have a place but, they must be strickly controlled and regulated to prevent problems from getting out of control.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

WAY TO GO, SNOOKY!

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Dear Snooky,
You have neatly divided the world into us vs. the "bunny huggers". My comment about losing credibility had nothing to do with "bunny huggers" and staunch antihunters. Obviously we aren't going to sway them whatever we do. My concern about losing credibility is with the vast majority of Americans in the middle, the people who don't hunt themselves but also are not in the "bunny hugger" class. These people watch as hunters and bunny huggers go at it, and wait and see. If hunters sell this nonsense that in 10 years there will not be any elk anymore, then that time comes and, aw shucks, there's still plenty of elk then we hunters are going to lose credibility big time. People are going to start taking anything else we have to say with a grain or two of salt. Why let that happen? Let's stake out a more rational ground, and leave the bunny huggers sounding like jackasses.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

When playing football in Florida many years ago, we had a saying on the locker room wall saying, "the best defense is a 20 point lead". ***** footin around with the animal rights wacko's is just getting father behind in the contest. If you havn't been involved actively in a battle with these nuts, I have. A few years ago they were steam rolling their way through the country like a hot knife through butter. California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Mass. ect. all took the "kid gloves approach and went down like a "one egg pudding" when the votes were counted". Then they came to Idaho with prop #2 to stop bear hunting with dogs. The early polls showed that Idaho would be their next victim by a good margin. We took off the gloves and shoved their lies and perverted animal worshipping doctrine in their face. We had booths at the fairs, sent letters to the editors of all the newspapers, called radio talk shows, flooded the neighborhoods with fliers. We exposed their views on animal supremacy, fairs, ranching, pets, eating animal products, wearing leather and fur. No punches were pulled for the sake of those who were undecided. When the votes were tallied, the bunny huggers were soundly defeated and havn't got up the nerve to try it again but I am sure they will regroup in time and be back. One of their main tactics is to devide and conquer and they are using the wolf issue to the fullest. If we are to preserve our hunting heritage we will have to fight to win. Pull a gun on me and I am not going to worry about what someone else thinks, it will be do unto them as they seek to do to you- only do it to them first! I will worry about what some bystander thinks after the smoke clears.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I agree with you on those tactics. I hadn't heard how Idaho had protected the bear hunts. ANd it is good to see hunters pull together and turn the tide. But hunters as a rule are pretty passive, we are all individualists. You seldom see hunters rise up in large numbers to defend our pastime. Percentage wise I bet it's not very high as to how many actually step forward and fight back. It is evident on some of the hunting forums. You see the same ones speaking out on controversial issues, such as George Taulman and wolves.

I read the USF&W report that the total number of license sales nation wide was down on the last count by 1 million, but still at over 17 million. Can you imagine what 17 million speaking as one could do???? But it will never happen.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

The sad thing about most sportsmen is they can't see the forest for the trees. The bunny huggers are out to stop ALL hunting and fishing along with and use of animals by humans for ANY reason. We are guilty of rejoiceing when another group, who hunts in a different style or manner than we, loses their opportunity to engage in the sport in the manner of choice. The houndsman rejoices because the trapper can't set traps in HIS woods. The archer rejoices because the houndsman can no longer free case his hounds in HIS forest. The black powder man rejoices because the archer no longer spooks the game from HIS honey hole. The rifleman rejoices because the primitive weapsons man no longer gets the first opportunity at His trophy. Any time any group loses any priviledge, we have all lost!! The bunny huggers can then move on to their next battle with a new victory under their belt and more determination than ever before. Do we think that those who have made fox hunting in jolly old England illegal are not connected to those who have filed lawsuits to stop the bass tournaments, outlaw trapping, stop hound hunting of bear, spring bear hunts, ect. here in the US? Sportsman MUST fight together reqardless of the petty issue or we will all become the losers! The bunny huggers have infiltrated the school system, taken over the cartoon and kids channels ect, and are bombarding our children with their propaganda daily. There must be a strong voice crying in opposition if we are to stand a chance to survive. Silence may be golden BUT it can also be cowardice.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I think you make some very good points Snooky. If hunters feel that they are correct about controversial issues, like wolves, then they should fight adamantly for what they believe in. The undecided masses will be much more persuaded by a clear, unambiguous message than hunters who, as a group, are undecided themselves. Also, in this day and age of short attention spans, the general population is more likely to react favorably to messages that are put in their face and repeated over and over---just like with local elections, uninformed or undecided voters may cast their ballot for the politician because of name recognition from all of his dam signs along the road.

Unfortunately, as you pointed out, it is terribly hard to get hunters to make organized efforts in the political arena, unless most are sure that it is a do or die situation because they are individualists. I think that if the entire hunting community would mobilize to fight for the causes they believe in, the undecided masses would be needed less than what many suspect.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Here was a letter that was in the casper paper today. Very interesting as you look and see who the guy used to work for.

Wolf tourism a fantasy





Editor:

Shelley Ridenour's fantasy piece, "Wolf expert sees need for better methods," cries out for a common-sense response.

Saying wolf effects on livestock are not completely known "because the best ways to measure those effects haven't been determined" is absurd. U.S. and Canadian hunters, ranchers and rural people have been living with wolves for 200 years. Wildlife managers and university professors have studied wolves for 100 years. The suggestion that there is some a+b=c equation for wolves either by area or sex or pack numbers or population densities is ridiculous. Can we predict what "a" or "a typical" domestic dog will do if it gets loose? No, and wolves are just as adaptable and unpredictable as any domestic dog. Who is silly enough to believe that wolves that haven't killed but a few calves or elk or dogs, when hungry or in snow or with young to feed, won't kill a whole lot of such critters at one time given the opportunity?

Who can say they won't kill kids at a winter bus stop or and old lady walking from a barn under any circumstance? The best anyone dares say is "they haven't." Wolves can seriously damage a rancher's herds and flocks. They can seriously depress big game populations. They kill pets and farm dogs and they are a real threat to rural residents.

Hidden agendas as shutting down public land grazing, eliminating hunting, vacating rural countryside, imposing animal rights and environmental radicalism are what are behind the wolf program.

The rest of this piece was just nonsense. Why would the state (or the feds for that matter) not recognize the increasingly prohibitive cost of "catching" or tranplanting or killing every wolf that does something bothersome? So what happens when wolf populations explode and harm is rampant and the federal government will once again (as in America 100 years ago) have to spend the equivalent of millions annually to kill a few of many harmful wolves?

Colorado "wildlife managers" say there are 100,000 too many elk in Colorado. Could Colorado use the economic benefits from selling 200,000 to 300,000 more elk tags to kill the 100,000 "too many" elk? What do the wolves eat after they eat the old and sick and the 100,000? The wolves kill what they can, they may eat all of it or some of it. When their numbers reach a maximum and the food is mostly gone or reduced, what do they eat then?

Wolf tourism is as likely as tourism for spotted owls. What is natural or appealing about wolves managed like free-ranging dogs?

JIM BEERS, Centerville, Va.

Retired wildlife biologist, special agent and refuge manager

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I had to check this Jim Beers out. He is quite the outdoors person. A real deal and an old school USF&W! Do a search on his name and you will see. I was shocked, as I thought all USF&W people were like the pompous ass, Ed Bangs!

Jim Beers
Jim Beers, 60, a Virginia Sportsman, is the man that blew the whistle on USFWS headquarters' Pittman-Robertson Program financial mismanagement in 1998-99. He is also a former police officer who spent 30 years working for the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Beers is federal programs coordinator for the National Trappers Association.

Jim retired from the US Fish and Wildlife Service after 30 years. He served as a wildlife biologist, wetlands biologist, special agent, and refuge manager. After working for the Utah Fish & Game and spending four years as a Reserve Officer in the US Navy, he joined the US Fish & Wildlife Service and was stationed in Devils Lake, North Dakota; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Grand Island, Nebraska; New York City; and Washington, DC.


While in Washington Jim was a Congressional Fellow, the Chief of Operations for the National Wildlife Refuge System, the Program Coordinator for the Animal Damage Control Program, and for his final seven years he was the wildlife biologist in the Central Office who served as Project Officer on nearly all national wildlife projects funded with Pittman-Robertson money.


Appointees of the Clinton Administration cleansed the US Fish and Wildlife Service of many wildlife management biologists like Jim to replace them with new age employees who supported eliminating the management of plants and animals for sustainable uses as spelled out in laws. Jim resisted and eventually testified before Congress about how the Service was misusing millions of dollars intended for state wildlife management programs to do things prohibited by Congress. This was being done in secret collusion with animal rights and environmental organizations. After spending ten months at home with full pay and no work assignment, Jim Beers accepted a cash settlement and retired in 1999. He holds a Bachelors in Wildlife Resources from Utah State University and a Masters in Public Administration from the University of Northern Colorado.


Articles